[吃喝玩乐]
和学校撕破脸皮

其他家长也不爽
We looked round it several times. I didn't like the Head - great business woman but I preferred the approach and ethos of the Heads at other schools. I questioned what the value added was at a school like that as it is very selective and several current parents complained to me of the pressure their girls are under.

I think there was a tv show on it that painted it badly. It was about the international rich - and the girls were all quite vacuous. I am sure it was just bad tv but it put me right off.

we were bitterly disappointed by the junior houses and the lack of warmth and activities at the weekend. Given that most weekends the younger years are required to stay put, this really put us off. The academic pressure bothered us only in that there didn't seem like anything else to do except study and all of the things that shape the girls for the future seemed to be missing.

Several people I knew chose for their very bright kids to go to second division boarding schools. Less peer pressure and a less pressure to do well for league tables, but they thrived. Sometimes the most academic schools are not the best schools.

Sadly, that did put us off quite a bit - dreary, dark and rather soulless. It was a Saturday afternoon and some girls were being picked up by their families to go home and others were getting ready to board the bus to London and the ones left behind just looked rather bored. I then did some more research and spoke to Mums who had sent their girls to Xxx and they said that it is really a weekly boarding school, very pressurised, big foreign contingent due to their set up in Shanghai and also the sort of school with a big set leaving at 6th form mostly because they prefer co-ed schools or find the pressure a tad too much. You didn't say whether your Kid was high achieving or not but do remember that getting in a boarding school nowadays at 11 (or younger) is easier than a Grammar School or highly sought after Independent School

Birmingham

Burnt using chemicals in science lesson £6,750

Hit in eye by ball £5,750

Fell on snow and ice £17,000

London

Door shut on pupil's finger causing tip to be severed £3,500

Accident damaging teeth £13,730

Stepped off a bench onto protruding nail £9,585

Accident leading to fractured arm £14,547

Tile from roof hit claimant £13,500

Fell from climbing frame £23,226

Manchester

Claimant fell off rope swing and hit head on plank £10,550

Ran into barbed wire causing injury £2,864

'The statistics emerging from these three cities are only the tip of the iceberg and the total number of accidents occurring in schools across England and Wales no doubt runs into many thousands more.'

Throughout London’s 33 boroughs, more than £1.6 million has been paid out from council coffers after youngsters were involved in accidents at school.

In Greater Manchester, more than £1.5 million was paid in compensation by local authorities across the area’s 10 boroughs.

Birmingham City Council, the safest of the three cities, reported that just under £190,000 was paid out during the five-year period.

Only London’s Croydon Council failed to provide any information.

Mr Dunning added: 'Health and safety is not being managed properly in the education sector and this is costing taxpayers millions, not only in direct compensation, but also additional hidden costs from administration.

ADVERTISEMENT

'It’s clear from the nature of the accidents that many areas are being overlooked by school managers and teachers, not through any fault of their own, but because they haven’t received the necessary training required to identify the potential risks and hazards that may prevent an accident from happening in the first place.

'These are quite basic health and safety failings and the government needs to invest more in training, so that accidents that put children in danger are avoided.'

Injuries for which the school is liable
It is very common for children to have an accident at school, as they are susceptible to numerous risks. They are naturally curious and generally do not have a full understanding of the potential hazards. So the schools have a very large responsibility to keep your children safe and prevent any accidents. It is important to know the most common accidents your children face at school.

Common playground injuries
One of the most common accidents involves playground equipment. Although your schools want your children to have fun, they have to balance it out with safety. For example, your children may experience extreme joy on climbing structures referred to by those in the know as 'monkey bars', but it is so easy for them to have an accident so precautions have to be made such as having protected floors to cushion falls and restricting the height of the bars to make it more safe. If your school does not take the appropriate precautions and your child suffers an injury such as a broken bone, you may be entitled to compensation.

Another standard injury at school is a slip or trip. Children may not be the most careful with hazards such as holes or spillages making the floor slippery, so they have to be careful and act efficiently. Signs would normally suffice, however you can never be sure with children.

Schools should also be aware of risks on the playing fields. As fields are easily accessible to trespassers the schools must maintain its safety for when your children are playing sport. They should also make sure if your children own any sports equipment on their premises for example cricket bags, they must ensure they are sufficiently locked away to prevent them from being stolen.

Two common accidents that the schools are liable for but happen outside the premises are school buses and school outings. They must be supervised and kept safe and for the buses it is the drivers’ responsibility to make sure they are safe by driving carefully and making sure their seatbelts are fastened.

Compensation for injuries on the playground
Your children are susceptible to accidents in the playground, be it from another child, a climbing frame or even the weather. Teachers have to keep the children's safety in mind, which will mean supervising the children as much as possible and looking out for possible accidents, which will also include keeping an eye on the weather.

Injuries in the playground
If your child is injured as a result of another child there are certain factors you have to keep in mind when making a claim. For example, it is important to know the age of the other child. This is because the younger the child and your child are the more likely you are to receive compensation for the injury. Also, the older the other child the more likely you will be compensated and if the act is seen as bullying you can even make a criminal injury claim. As the children are very naive to the dangers of the playground such as falling off climbing frames, it is important that there is maximum supervision from the teachers. If not, it is likely you can claim compensation. You should also keep in mind the surface of the playground and if it is suitable to impact your child’s fall. Supervision cannot prevent a child’s fall so they should take out the measures to cushion their fall. If your child has suffered an injury due to a hard surface under a climbing frame, for example, the school will be liable for compensation because they should provide a padded or bark surface at the least.

Hazardous weather
Another factor to take into account if your child gets injured in the playground is the weather. For example, if your child slips on wet leaves or ice the school would be to blame because they did not take the appropriate action in clearing the hazard. If the ice or leaves had been there for a while and they were in a location which was commonly used by the children and they slipped, breaking an arm, for example, you will have a strong claim for compensation.

How to make a claim if your child has been hurt when using a climbing frame
Climbing frames are a very popular attraction for children during playtime, which also means it is a common hazard to them. The dangers of climbing frames vary with different structures and heights. Your school has a large responsibility with your children's safety which requires constant supervision, especially as children of a young age are particularly oblivious to the physical dangers of the climbing frames. The younger they are the more care is needed and the stronger your claim will be following an accident.

Climbing frame injuries
Whilst playing on a climbing frame your child can easily suffer a broken bone due to a fall. The frames may be too high for the children, proving too much of a risk when they fall, or the surface below may be too hard and not sufficiently cushion their fall. In either of these circumstances the school will be deemed responsible for the injury. Sometimes supervision cannot help an accident but teachers should still give warnings to the dangers of the climbing frame.

School liability
In the case that your child is pushed off a frame due to another child it is still the school’s responsibility. Teachers should be supervising the area and make themselves aware of the risks. Developing a claim for compensation in this case may be difficult, but there are different ways you can go about it. You can make a claim against the school using a solicitor and evidence of the injury or you can take it up with the other child's parents first. If contacting the parents is difficult it is recommended you take the case up with the head of school. If you feel your child has been bullied you can even make a criminal injury compensation claim if the other child is over the age of 10.

You can claim if your child is wounded by another
If your child is injured by another child at school, you may be entitled to compensation. Even if it seems unlikely and you have attempted to contact people responsible to no avail, you should know it may still be possible to make a claim.

Firstly you need to make sure it was a deliberate act that caused the injury to your child. If your child says it was a deliberate act you should contact the school immediately or even contact the police if a lack of action is being taken. If this is the case it is important to know that a child is criminally responsible for their actions from the age of 10 so you may even wish to claim criminal injury compensation on your child's behalf.

School's responsibility
If you take the incident up with your school and they refuse to take responsibility, it is recommended you seek a child accident lawyer as schools should never deny responsibility for your child's safety. You will automatically be in the right when taking up this sort of claim up with your lawyer, as even if the school may not seem to be to blame as such an incident would be the fault of the other child, they should always accept responsibility for your child's safety at school.

If you do not wish to take the case up with your solicitor and instead try to contact the parents of the child responsible for your child's injury and do not have much luck doing so, it may be better to take it up with the head of your school and make it a more formal case.

Claiming for school sports injuries
Sporting injuries at school are very common, especially in contact sports such as rugby and football. These injuries can range from sprains on muscles and tendons to dislocations and broken bones. When determining whether you should make a claim against the school for compensation or not, you should firstly consider how exactly the injury happened. This is because if the injury occurred within the laws of the game nobody is really to blame. On the other hand, in rugby, if contact was made outside the laws of the game, such as a 'spear tackle' and your child suffered neck injuries or any injury for that matter, a claim for compensation should be made.

Teacher supervision
The teachers at the school in question will also be a determining factor when making a claim. Although with contact sports there will inevitably be knocks and injuries, the teachers still have to supervise, provide training and warn the children of the possible injuries. While the teacher is coaching and helping the children they still need to ensure their safety at all times.

You also have to consider how old your child was at the time of the injury. Younger children are more naive to the dangers of physical activities so the younger the children are, the more care the teachers should have in looking after them. If your child has suffered an injury at an early age the stronger your claim for compensation will be.

The teachers also have to make sure children are not susceptible to getting injured by larger and older children by maintaining games are fair and safe.Parental indemnity

A common question after an accident to your child is whether parental indemnity - accepting a sum of money on behalf of your child from the perpetrator of the accident - is an appropriate way to conclude their claim. We advise that a parental indemnity is not the proper way to conclude your child's claim. The most appropriate and best way of claiming your child's compensation is to take the case to court in front of an infant approval hearing or minor settlement hearing.

Advantages of an infant approval hearing
An advantage of this is that you will explain the case to the court and they will act in the best interests of your child instead of a simple form between you and the person who caused the accident. The judge will look over the medical evidence, listen to the barrister's advice to provide the correct amount of compensation and if there is evidence to show, your child should receive more compensation as the judge will require the guilty party to increase the offer.

Another advantage of an infant approval hearing has over parental indemnity is that the potential compensation will be invested by the court until the child is 18. This means the money may gain interest and is released when the child will have a better idea of how to use it.

You can also claim back the legal costs of the solicitor when taking the case to court. This will be added to the compensation and will be taken from the guilty party. The solicitor is an advantage in itself. The best evidence will be gathered in the form of expert reports and they can also get advice from a barrister which increases the chance of getting maximum compensation. The process will generally be quicker and expertly done.

Can you still claim if your child was trespassing?
If your child has an accident whilst trespassing you can still claim for compensation. The compensation will come from the occupier who owns the land your child suffered an injury on. It is generally the case that when a child trespasses they are attracted to something to make them want to trespass, for example a wooded area or something to climb on. This is known as an allurement. The occupier should your prevent the child from being attracted to the allurement by fencing up the area.

Responsibility of landowners
The occupier has the responsibility to make sure nobody is injured on their land. For example, say somebody owned a wooded area behind their garden with numerous trees, bushes and dead branches that backed onto a park and only had an old fence with large holes in as an attempt to prevent people from trespassing. Your young child enters through one of the large holes in the fence and whilst exploring the area a dead branch falls from a tree, landing on the child. Your child suffers an injury but even though they had a fence they may still be responsible because the hazardous area was not appropriately blocked off. They should make sure the fence has no holes and possible have signs warning people of the danger.

Compensation claims
So even if your child trespasses on somebody else's land and suffers an injury, you can still make a claim. If the occupier has an allurement they have to make sure children cannot enter the premises as they may not have the understanding of the dangers and enter anyway.

What is needed for a child injury claim
As a child:
You can make a claim at any time from the date of your accident until you are 21 years of age as opposed to an adult, who has only three years to make a claim from the date of the injury.
You cannot make a claim for compensation if you are a minor.
You are classified as a ‘minor’ if you are below the age of 18.
As a minor you need a 'litigation friend' to make a claim, which is generally a parent or guardian.
Somebody other than a parent or guardian will need proof to show they can act on your behalf.
If you have difficulty finding a litigation friend you may be given permission to make a claim within 3 years of the time you become 21.
Your litigation friend cannot be a solicitor.
You cannot give out instructions for your compensation claim.
As a minor you will need a litigation friend and preferably a personal injury lawyer to make a claim.
After the age of 18 you can make a claim yourself and hire your own solicitor.
After a successful claim the compensation you receive will be invested in the court funds office which nobody can touch.
You are not permitted to access the compensation until you are 18 years of age.
As a parent:
If your child suffers an injury and they are younger than 18, it is your responsibility to make the claim if you feel it is best for the child.
When making a claim on behalf of your child you are known as their ‘litigation friend’.
As their litigation friend you have to deal with all the everyday aspects of the claim.
It is up to you to hire your own personal injury lawyer and assist them with making the claim.
You should help gather evidence and explain the case to the solicitor.
You have to stand in front of an infant approval hearing in court to finalize the claim.
If the claim is successful you will talk with the judge to decide how you want to invest the compensation which is usually in the court funds office.
The stages of a child injury claim
It is important to know what age classifies somebody as a child, when they should make a claim, if they need someone to claim on their behalf and the time limit for claiming. The technical term for a child is a 'minor', which applies to those under the age of 18. Children cannot make their own claim until they are 18, so an adult must make the claim on their behalf. The adult is usually the parent and is known as the ‘litigation friend’ — they will deal with all the aspects of the case. In the case of somebody other than the parent dealing with the case, they will have to show proof they can act on the child's behalf.

As child accident claims are different, a claim must be made by the time the victim is 21 instead of within 3 years of the accident, as is the norm. UK laws give children more of a chance to make a claim and even if they cannot find a litigation friend they are allowed three years to make a claim by themselves after the age of 21.

When making a claim the child, the litigation friend and a personal injury lawyer will stand before a court or infant approval hearing to finalise the claim. The judge will look into all the information gathered such as evidence and medical reports and listen to all the views in court and make a decision. Your personal injury lawyer will prepare you and assist you all the way through the court process.

If successful, the compensation will be invested in the court funds office (to the litigation friend’s discretion) which nobody can touch until the minor reaches the age of 18.

For anyone unable to access today's original Sunday Times article, I append it here. It's a harrowing read...

FYI the accompanying news piece says that more than two dozen other victims have now come forward. Looks like this one may run and run.

CJ Sansom: Ten years at George Watson’s College nearly killed me. Half a century on, I fear it’s still a bullies’ playground

Reports of bullying allegedly tolerated by a top Edinburgh school have reawoken terrifying memories for one former pupil, CJ Sansom, author of the bestselling, Tudor-set Shardlake novels. Now terminally ill, he begs parents: please, don’t let your own child suffer

One reviewer of my latest novel commented that “atmospheres of oppression and wariness, in which careless words . . . can be fatal” seem to engross me. That is true, and this article is about why. Last December I watched the Netflix drama The Crown. One episode portrayed the bullying of Prince Charles at Gordonstoun in the 1960s. It shook me deeply, for it brought back my terrible years as a pupil at George Watson’s College, an Edinburgh private day school, which scarred me for life and nearly resulted in my death by suicide at 15.

I googled Watson’s and found a slew of press articles about a recent bullying investigation at the school. The allegations concerned a girl, Kate — though of course that is not her real name — who from the start of her time as a primary school pupil at Watson’s was incessantly hit, mocked and excluded from play. She is said to have stayed within touching distance of the playground wall, and took refuge in the lavatories, where a group of girls switched the lights off so it was pitch black. Her parents said they met with a “culture of denial” from the school that let the bullying continue. In the end they took her away.

Reading these articles, I found myself shaking uncontrollably. So many of Kate’s alleged experiences — the mocking, the exclusion, the taking refuge in the lavatories, even the standing against the wall — mirrored to the last detail my recollections of my own experiences at Watson’s half a century ago.

I was there for 10 years, mocked and isolated by the other children while the teachers blamed this on me and sometimes collaborated in it. I spent my whole time in the bottom form. All my life I have had the feelings of worthlessness, inferiority and self-blame characteristic of abused children.

I have wanted to write about this for years, and the determination of Kate’s parents to expose what happened to her, with the help of their MSP, Andy Wightman, has finally led me to realise fully that I was not the only one; that what happened was not my fault. They gave me the courage to go public, and I thank them.

But coupled with this is my profound worry that — half a century later — the same things may be happening at Watson’s as happened to me, while the school is said to have denied it has problems and blamed the victim. The headmaster, Melvyn Roffe, claimed Kate was “having problems making friends”, just what my primary school teachers used to tell my parents. And my story and Kate’s are not the only ones of bullying at a school that charges fees of up to £11,900 a year and has 2,364 pupils, aged 3-18. To me it seems Watson’s is concerned to protect its reputation, not the victims of abuse — an approach with a long and lamentable history in certain educational institutions.

To go back in time: when I entered the (then single-sex) primary school in 1957, pupils seemed to be divided between the academically bright and well behaved, who got most attention, the mass in the middle including the less bright (or those categorised as such) and those who were in some way “different” or “disobedient”. There is a Japanese proverb that the nail that sticks out gets hammered down, and that was the Watson’s approach: more boot camp than school, in my experience, unless you were academically bright or good at rugby. Those who misbehaved or did badly in class were a nuisance and left to the bullies.

Of course, the bullying of a minority of children, usually by a minority, happens at all schools. Children are not angels. But it is the responsibility of any school to seek actively to prevent it.

Watson’s, then as now, was prestigious, very much part of the Edinburgh establishment. At morning assembly we were told how privileged we were to be there. Watson’s teachers were the “high heid yins”, unchallengeable by parents even when they were told, as mine were by the head of the primary school, that their child deserved to be “put at the back of the class and forgotten”.

Like most children targeted by bullies, when I went to Watson’s at the age of four I was already “odd”. From birth I was noisy and uncontrollable, a trial and a puzzle to my parents. Starting at Watson’s, I was totally at sea in this vast place full of regimented lines of little children being led to and fro and given instructions that I could not take in, let alone follow. I remember asking a teacher what room I was supposed to be in, and his curt, snappy reply, angry about my inattention. And when my puzzlement at what I was supposed to be doing turned to tears, I was done for. Tears attract bullies as jam attracts wasps.

For years my school reports were full of my inattention: the failure to concentrate or take my work seriously. I remember the primary school head as a foul-tempered, vicious man, and I was one of his bêtes noires. Yet I didn’t steal, or vandalise school property, or hurt anybody. I just couldn’t get it together.

I think now, having recently taken the standard medical test, I probably had ADHD. As is common, the symptoms disappeared in my teens. Indeed my mother cottoned on to this years later when she read a book, The Hyperactive Child, and said it described me as a child exactly.

Of course, one would not expect teachers in the 1960s to know what ADHD was, but they might at least have considered there might be some other reason for my behaviour than just being “bad”. And their apparent collaboration in the bullying was unforgivable.

As with Kate’s account, it began almost immediately: I vividly remember crying, surrounded by a circle of jeering boys. Like her, I hid in the lavatories, but the boys followed me in and continued tormenting me, putting their heads over the top and under the bottom of the cubicle until the janitor, a brutal retired regimental sergeant-major, came in to find out what the noise was, and shouted at me for causing the trouble. (Where were the playground supervision staff, if any, while Kate’s bullying was going on?)

Bullies always need a tag to hang on their victims. I was tall for my age, but skinny, so they used my name. I was the opposite of the strong Samson of the Bible: weak, skinny Sansom. This tag haunted me all through my schooldays.

Mostly, I managed to avoid physical violence, though the threat was always near. I learnt I must not cry. At lunchtime and breaks I hid in empty classrooms and, later on, in a cavity inside a pile of unused chairs covered with a fire curtain in the assembly hall. It was dangerous, but I was past caring.

I did have friends from time to time, though my endless talking would drive them away. And always, underneath, was the sense of inferiority, difference, shame. Poor reports and complaints from school caused problems with my parents: thus Watson’s bled into my home life.

Yet even then I had other, conflicting feelings — a burning sense of injustice and anger. Why had I been singled out? What had I done that was so wicked and wrong? I think my rage kept me from falling completely apart.

Is it correct to call this abuse? I suffered no sexual and little physical violence — but constant emotional abuse can also permanently affect the victim. All my life I have found it impossible to trust others, or to allow them to get close to me. I was not the only one to suffer in this way — I remember two other boys in my year also being targeted, partly because they cried.

One might also ask, given the terrible lives of deprived children today — poverty, violence, gangs — why anyone should be concerned about privileged private school pupils. My answer is: all are children. And private schools, where powers of inspection are very limited, can in many ways behave as they like.

CJ Sansom in school uniform: he started at George Watson’s aged five CJ Sansom in school uniform: he started at George Watson’s aged five ANDREW HASSON Some teachers, usually the younger ones, were decent people, looking on me with puzzlement rather than scorn. Others, though, would mock me themselves, knowing it would get a laugh from the boys. One teacher, I remember, got a laugh by describing me as sitting staring into space like a “contented cow”.

In 1963, aged 10, I moved into the class of a fierce disciplinarian who on the first day picked me and another boy out, said we were known for misbehaviour and sat us at the front of the classroom, where he could keep an eye on us. In my experience Watson’s was expert at giving a dog a bad name and hanging him.

And so on to secondary school. My performance was so bad that my parents took me to a psychiatrist to find out whether I was “mentally deficient”. They were dumbfounded when a test revealed my IQ to be not unusually low, but unusually high. I then underwent psychotherapy. I remember little about it, but it was no use. There was no way I could reveal my feelings of vulnerability, anger and hatred, feelings so unbearable I had begun dissociating from them, forgetting Watson’s the moment I stepped outside, increasingly living in an escapist world of books, films and television.

It was suggested I try to become less unpopular by joining in school activities. Watson’s second obsession after academic success was rugby, and though I had always been hopeless and uncoordinated at PE, I went along to join the after-school practice. The boys in the changing room greeted my arrival with gales of laughter: “Sansom’s come!” I turned round and walked out.

Rugby was no loss. Other things were. The one sport I immediately took to was swimming, but the teacher put me, with a few others he had been told were duds, in the shallow end and told us to stay there, splashing about while the rest of the boys were taught the strokes. Years later I did learn swimming and enjoyed it for many years. The pleasure of it in childhood, as with so much else, was stolen by my experience at Watson’s. The same went for music: I asked about joining the choir but was turned down flat, never even allowed to a practice. It was years before I could listen to classical music — now it is one of the pleasures of life, but again it was stolen for years.

By the time I was 14, I was, I now realise, becoming seriously mentally ill: completely isolated, hardly aware of what was being said in the classroom, consumed with rage, plagued by migraines and tormented by thoughts of suicide and burning down the school. There were some compassionate teachers; but, though they tried to help, I was beyond their intervention. The bullying now consisted mainly of people shouting “spastic” or other insults down the corridor, or just shouting out my name and laughing.

Then I turned 15, at that time the school leaving age. Realising I could not legally be forced to return, I walked out of Watson’s and refused to go back.

But the damage was done. Shortly afterwards I took a massive overdose of my mother’s sleeping pills; I was found only just in time. Both my parents were profoundly shocked and, for the first time, realised how ill I was.

There followed a year as an inpatient at a mental hospital. There, for the first time in my life, I was not treated as a pariah, and I owe more than I can say to the devotedly caring staff. They saved my life, just as I feel my time at Watson’s nearly destroyed it. My mind came to life and I found interests in literature, history and politics; I began, if clumsily, to develop social skills. But still I could not bear to talk about my school experiences.

I went to college and did O and A-levels, and then a history BA and PhD; I later retrained as a solicitor (now retired) and became a novelist. I left Watson’s with no qualifications whatever; all the money my father paid in fees might as well have been stuffed down the nearest drain.

It may seem a tenuous line between what happened to me in the Fifties and Sixties and the alleged mistreatment of Kate in the 2010s. But we are not alone. In 2010 a 14-year-old Watson’s pupil, saying he was the victim of relentless bullying, threatened online to shoot the three worst bullies and then himself. The police came; there was no gun, but there was obviously a serious problem; Watson’s had no comment.

After Kate’s case was reported, Wightman, the MSP, revealed he had received “many emails and phone calls from parents and former pupils informing me of very serious problems”. Watson’s first reaction was not to follow up these matters with him but to denigrate him.

What fuels my fear that there may be embedded, institutional bullying at Watson’s is the response of the school. After a complaint by Kate’s parents and an official inspection, the Registrar of Independent Schools reviewed the case and said: “The Scottish ministers are satisfied that George Watson’s College is at risk of becoming objectionable on the following ground: that the welfare of a pupil attending the school is not adequately safeguarded and promoted there. Accordingly, the Scottish ministers are satisfied that it is necessary . . . to impose conditions on the running of George Watson’s College.”

The conditions included the implementation of a new complaints handling policy, and a report on how the governing council “provides the scrutiny and challenge to school policy and practice required to deliver continued improvement”. The school has responded that the conditions related not to bullying or child safeguarding but to governance. In March the Scottish government removed the conditions, even though one may not by then have been fully met.

Independent schools in Scotland are not subject to regular inspections, unlike state schools. I have said that in my time I saw others suffer prolonged bullying. The school’s initial reaction to Kate’s experiences and to the subsequent review appals me.

It took many years for me to speak out publicly, and I wonder how many others are out there, suffering silently. I hope they too may find the courage, which heaven knows is not easy, to break their silence. Doing so has given me a new sense of freedom — late in life, but still worth having. I wish I could do more myself, but I have incurable cancer, which prevents that. Should evidence emerge that victimisation of the “different” is institutionally embedded at Watson’s, I hope others will pick up the torch.

Kate’s mother said in an interview that “sometimes you hear of parents who have a child die and spend the rest of their own lives campaigning. I feel so grateful our daughter is alive — we got her out in time.” This is not hyperbole — I came within an inch of death myself, and Kate has allegedly suffered lifelong injuries. Based on my experience, this is my advice to any parent whose child is in any way distinct, or different, or individual: think very carefully about your choice of school.

And to parents generally, I would say that bullying, especially prolonged bullying, can have terrible consequences. Please, please, be on your guard.

2 Comments14

DuskytheHusky • May 7, 2018, 1:05 AM
I went to a private school too, and there was some bullying there - similar to what is in the press about GW too. It's a bizarre environment to go into, being from outside the private school system, and it took me a year or two to bed myself in; I can totally see how people get isolated and picked on, in hindsight.

The reports coming out of GW are terrible, but it does seem to be in the complete minority, and there is no way that something bad enough to make the press isn't being worked on by the school internally, as well as by the government. The worst thing that could happen to a fee paying school is for people to not want to send their kids there - they survive almost entirely on the revenue, charity status aside.

I can't help but think that, like the author said, the link between his experience in the 50s and what's happening now is tenuous, linked only by being at the same school. Private schools back then were vastly different to what they're like now, and horror stories back then were abound.

Anecdotally, I've a fair number of friends and colleagues that send their kids to GW, and they had no idea anything was going on until it was reported in the press... Let's hope they sort it out soon; who knows, perhaps with a new school year starting next year, some of the people involved will no longer attend?

4
anedinburghman • May 9, 2018, 3:44 AM
it is of no matter if it is a minority issue (can bullying realistically be anything else, except where the staff are wholesale complicit/incompetent?); the issue is that repeatedly, throughout different establishments (schools/care homes/wherever), insiders and outsiders (including auditors etc) brush off not just anecdotal and specific incidents, but evidence of institutional errors, tolerance or denial of systemic issues, neglecting their duty of care and their (normally) stated policy of zero tolerence to such issues.

I don't consider myself a severe victim of bullying but I share many of the experiences and feelings above so I feel I have a voice in this.